Changing the Bible
When you change a word in the King James Bible because you want easier reading, you have then forced or at least steered the next reader to use your understanding of scripture.
It is one thing to say, "this word means this or that." It is another thing to go ahead and edit out the word and replace it. You then have given no option to someone coming along behind you. They must use your word. See the difference? It is so basic that the over-educated can't get that.
Why not just stay with the first word, and allow a discernment and discussion? Why must you delete the first word under the wrong assumption that it is outdated?
Part of the reason is because you believe in evolution. Social evolution, natural evolution, and so on. That belief carries over into the church and into how we read scripture.
I often tell about the time I was debating an atheist. This unbelieving man was mocking the King James Bible. He said, "I don't believe that the bible is true and I don't believe in your God. But if I did, I would have to say that the New International Version, the NIV, or at least some other modern version, is the word of God. Because if there was a book written by God, it would have to evolve over time. And that King James Bible, it hasn't changed in 400 years! The NIV adapts to the times. So, I have to think that it would be more true that the KJV."
See the thinking there? Why do people in churches, bible teachers, pastors and preachers and people in the pews who want a so-called easier to understand bible, agree with an openly hostile to God atheist? Because